On Mon, 15 May 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> On May 15, 2006, at 5:21 PM, Sciss wrote:
> > however changing the existing object is not a good idea, it will
> > certainly be not backward compatible.
Yes, might be true. Thats why I asked how many people are using mod
in order to do the operation and truncate the result.
Personally I never used it that way.
man fmod:
DESCRIPTION
The fmod() function computes the remainder of dividing x by y.
The return value is x - n * y, where n is the quotient of x / y,
rounded towards zero to an integer.
Günter
> >
> > best, -sciss-
> >
> > Am 15.05.2006 um 12:51 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
> >
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 May 2006, geiger wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 11 May 2006, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> >>>> [div] ... and [mod] in that case.
> >>>
> >>> Some definitions of [mod] extend it to be able to use the real
> >>> numbers
> >>> as first parameter. So 2.45 mod 2 would be 0.45.
> >>> I think this could be a good extension to Pd's mod object, and it
> >>> should also be backwards compatible to its current behaviour.
> >>> The change inside the code would be trivial. Question is how many
> >>> patches
> >>> depend on the truncation after the mod operation.
> >>
> >> I think that [mod] should probably do whatever ANSI C or ISO math
> >> stuff does, which I think it currently is doing. Most programming
> >> languages follow these conventions, so its a good idea for Pd to
> >> as well.
> >>
> >> But the object you propose does sound handy, so maybe it should be
> >> a separate object, like [floatmod].
> >>
> >> .hc
>>> ________________________________________________________________________
> ____
>> If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
> -
> Eldridge Cleaver
>>> _______________________________________________
>PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list>